the topic of topics: MIDI vs AUDIO ("what is music"?)

[crumhorn]

I don't think any sensible person would say that ALL sound is music.

Are you actually interested in discussing this or are you simply going to keep restating your position until everyone starts agreeing with you?

If you can get a majority to adopt your definition then I'll go along with it too, anything for a quiet life.

[rote fahne]

I don't think any sensible person would say that ALL sound is music.

Are you actually interested in discussing this or are you simply going to keep restating your position until everyone starts agreeing with you?

If you can get a majority to adopt your definition then I'll go along with it too, anything for a quiet life.

Ma sta girando il culo.

[H20nly]

Wow! This was certainly an interesting way of wasting time.

The problem, 9V, is that if your definition were to be accepted, it would change absolutely nothing. It would only mean that we would talk about listening to "audio" instead of listening to "music". So, let's say that you "won" this discussion: what did you accomplish, aside from a towering nine pages of banter? (which, I'm beginning to think is exactly your goal, seeing as you were banned for the exact same thing at PH).

I think sporkles nailed it.

9V you keep going on and on, but you're either translating incorrectly or just confused. at least one of the people whose comments you have been trying to ignore and deny is music theory instructor at a University here in the states... besides that, there are plenty of musicians on this forum and in this thread. who are all in agreement, except for you. in the entire time i've posted on this forum i don't think i've seen so many souls get together in one thread and agree on something. you're the odd man out and you have a hard on for Frank Zappa. face it.

[9V]

but your definition is deeply wrong. MIDI is music both in real time and "recorded" (written code). AUDIO is music only when played in real time: IS vs WAS. if recorded it WAS music. The key element is TIME, as i said before. That is why a cd playing is not "music". It is "the sound of music". It is so deeply different. When you "write music with audio" (?) you must give that music RULES, so that it can be replayed by someone else in another place, with different instruments. Otherwise it is everything but music.

[rote fahne]

When you "write music with audio" (?) you must give that music RULES, so that it can be replayed by someone else in another place, with different instruments. Otherwise it is everything but music.

But dear mister 9V, what a gibberish. If I write a piece of music, and tell the band what to play, and we are going to play, and we record the music we produce with microphones, then we write down the music we are playing in an audio file.

You really talk krep.

I dont have to do anything once I have written the music, (that is: the code).

[rote fahne]

but your definition is deeply wrong. MIDI is music both in real time and "recorded" (written code). AUDIO is music only when played in real time: IS vs WAS. if recorded it WAS music. The key element is TIME, as i said before. That is why a cd playing is not "music". It is "the sound of music". It is so deeply different. When you "write music with audio" (?) you must give that music RULES, so that it can be replayed by someone else in another place, with different instruments. Otherwise it is everything but music.

There is no IS vs WAS in the strictest sense of the definition of music. Again, your purity is fake.

One must give the music rules, what are you talking, thats another discussion, the discussion of the intepretation of the piece.

Stay to the discussion of the strict definition of music, that is the code, the one you came up with yourself, and then conclude that AUDIO is the code WITH the sound.

[crumhorn]

For a musician with a good ear hearing a tune is as good as seeing it written down.

[9V]

ok, maybe we are on different planets, i don't know. I try with this:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[crumhorn]

Ma sta girando il culo.

Google Translate = "But her ass is turning"?

[rote fahne]

ok, maybe we are on different planets, i don't know. I try with this:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Again, the criterium of manipulation if irrelivant. Once the audiofile has been recorded, the manipulation was already done, that is, playing the music, the manipulation of the instruments.

[drewbixcube]

Music itself is subjective, but it only has meaning to the listener when when it is heard. I don't care how much you go on about language or code. Music does not need rules to make sense to the listener. Regional music each has it's own set of rules, sure, but it doesn't mean you need to adhere to them in order to make or listen to music, unlike regional language. This is why music can be enjoyed "universally". What happens when you speak Italian to someone that doesn't understand how to read or write it, let alone understand the physical meaning of the words? What happens when you play a piece of music to a non-musician that they can personally groove to? The only reason we now have means of recording music, in writing or sound, is for posterity. So that the next time we want to hear the beautiful music we created, we can remember how to create it, and re-create it at our personal whim. I cannot sit in a blueprint of a comfortable chair, but once I follow that blueprint I can rest my weary feet.

Universal rules of grammar... lol.

Grammar is not universal. You can translate your Italian thoughts into English because you have learned and now understand English grammar. That doesn't mean you can translate your Italian thoughts into Swahili because you understand English. That would make grammar universal, in humankind's egotistical view anyway (global would be a more appropriate description).

You can separate audio from music, even distinguish the difference in your own context, by your own rules. However, you cannot separate music from audio because it IS audio. Do you agree that sound is a change in air pressure as perceived in a frequency and amplitude recognized by our auditory system? I hope so... Now, when a guitar string is plucked, with or without sheet music, the string vibrates at a certain set of frequencies relating to which string is plucked, yes? A wave of air molecules then permeates from the string in a manner analogous to the string and we can hear it. Take away the air molecules and not only can we not breath, but we cannot hear the string. A double whammy.

Can music exist without sheet music or MIDI? Most definitely. How you can't see this is way beyond me, and quite obviously the entire forum. I like philosophy as much as anyone. I even like arguing semantics. However, there are many things in this world which do not need further pondering. The sky is blue. The earth is round. The sun is hot. Music is sound.

[rote fahne]

Ma sta girando il culo.

Google Translate = "But her ass is turning"?

your ass.

[Broccoli]

[9V]

Again, the criterium of manipulation is irrelivant. Once the audiofile has been recorded, the manipulation was already done, that is, playing the music, the manipulation of the instruments.

it is not irrelivant. It is the most important element to define MUSIC. What you call "listen to my music" in an audio sequencer, radio, cd etc. it is the "recorded sound" of your music. But your music is not THAT SOUND. I understand this kind of arguments could sound complex or difficult to people who are not used to think "philosophically" about music (performers or home music makers). But things like these must be known if you try to be a musician.

[H20nly]